One of the last great soccer lies came in the form of David Beckham. He was supposed to make us blokes in the United States care about the sport. He was a global icon, we were told, the Tiger Woods of soccer, and he'd educate the American heathens about real football.
|
|
| For the U.S. and goalkeeper Tim Howard, another brief encounter with a spot on the world stage ends with a step back. (AP) |
"What he gives MLS is an immediate GQ rating and free advertising for the league wherever he goes," wrote ESPN.com. "Between talk-show appearances, the celeb circuit and hanging with the Hollywood A-listers (it's been reported that Brad Pitt has requested soccer lessons from Beckham for his son), Beckham will give MLS a buzz and intro to mainstream pop culture it has never had before."
"David Beckham is a global sports icon who will transcend the sport of soccer in America,” said Don Garber, commissioner of the MLS at the time.
None of that happened. Not an ounce of it ever came true. The average attendance of an MLS game is 14,883 people with cities like Dallas and Kansas City averaging around 9,000. The Professional Bowlers Association draws more interest. There was no Beckham Effect.
With time as an ally, it's easy to see that the Beckham signing was one of the great cons in recent American sports history.
More people know who Hedu Turkoglu is than David Beckham. In the end, the only things Beckham conquered in the America were Posh Spice and a few red carpets at Hollywood parties.
He was the 70 millionth person/moment/slash phenomenon that was supposed to transform America's attitude about soccer, going back to Pele and the New York Cosmos in the 1970s. Remember, Pele was named by Time Magazine as one of the 100 most important people of the 20th century. In retrospect, if Pele couldn't make this country care, no one could.
Fast forward to now, and here we go again.
When America beat Spain, the top-ranked country in the world, in the Confederations Cup last week, we were again lectured about watershed moments and forecasts of increasing U.S. interest. "This win is huge for American soccer," said U.S. player Clint Dempsey.
Then the U.S. lost 3-2 to Brazil on Sunday, after taking a 2-0 lead. Typical U.S. soccer. The Spanish win was a set-up. Another tease, followed by another spate of predictions on the upcoming American soccer emergence, followed by another letdown. It's the old U.S. soccer mamba.
How many times have Americans heard the soccer-will-transform-us mantra before? The site Deadspin.com compiled an interesting list.
In the 1994 World Cup the U.S. beat Colombia 2-1. "This game is going to have a permanent effect" on soccer in America, said Alan Rothenberg, president of the United States Soccer Federation. "It's the biggest so far in history."
The permanent effect wasn't so perfect.
The U.S. beat heavily favored Argentina in 1995 in the Copa America tournament. "I think this is the first step ... to become a major soccer power," said one of the U.S. players, Cobi Jones.
If by soccer power he meant minor world player, that was accurate.
The U.S. team beat Brazil in the 1998 Gold Cup, and the U.S. coach, Steve Sampson, was in full peacock mode. "[The win] states we can play with anyone in the world, and on occasion, beat the best in the world,” he said then.
Not in the World Cup, we can't.
In 2002 the U.S. beat Portugal in the World Cup 3-2. One MLS official at the time said it was the beginning of the emergence of that league.
What the U.S. does is get a handful of wins every decade or so -- or some faded star like Beckham uses our country -- and our wishful-thinking genetics kick in. I've been just as guilty of this as anyone.
It's typical American arrogance, however, to think that we can compete in a sport that, in many parts of the world, kids start playing in the womb.
If German athletes started crowing about how that country could put together an NFL team and then take on the Pittsburgh Steelers, we'd laugh.
The Great Soccer Con fooled me once before.
Feel free to be suckered again. I've learned my lesson.
